Presidential powers determine way forward for Europe

THE Constitutional Convention awaits its praesidium’s draft treaty articles addressing the thorny question of the presidencies of the Union, the European Council, Council and Commission, and also the Union’s external representation. Discussions at last week’s Athens summit confirmed the controversial nature of these issues and the split between large and small member states.

Currently, the office of president of the Council (not the Union) rotates six-monthly between the EU-15. The European Council meets under the chairmanship of the head of state or government of the member state holding the presidency.

The Commission president is appointed by member states’ governments, meeting as the Council and acting by qualified majority. That decision is then approved by the European Parliament.

Two possibilities under discussion are a long-term European Council presidency or an integrated presidency – a single president of the European Council and Commission. The decision must be made by unanimous approval of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC), after the Convention makes its consensual recommendations in the form of a draft treaty.

Institutional reform aims to increase legitimacy, simplicity, efficiency, consistency and transparency. The EU needs both a strong and effective Council to provide political impetus and strategic direction, and a strong, effective Commission to provide the implementation and fulfil its role as guardian of the treaty. All the main institutions should be, and can be, strengthened. And this need not be done at the expense of either.

Before addressing the question of presidencies, it is necessary to determine the future role, organisation and functions of the various institutions in order to fulfil the Union’s key objectives. These goals are: completing the single market, improving prosperity, consolidating monetary union, strengthening economic union, promoting social and economic cohesion, building internal and external security, and ensuring an effective EU voice in the world.

A long-term president of the European Council is favoured by several states (including France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK) but strongly opposed by most others – including nine accession countries. A single, integrated president is worthy of serious future consideration. But the idea is currently premature.

The solution

It is difficult to see how the Convention will reach consensus – or the IGC reach unanimity – on either of these proposals. As neither the long-term European Council presidency nor the single, integrated presidency is currently achievable, the only solution is the status quo or a variation of it.

It is evident that the system of a rotating Council presidency cannot continue with 25 member states: countries would hold the presidency less than once each decade and several smaller accession countries do not have the resources to support a presidency. Team presidencies of three states have been suggested, but this is an untidy solution that will hardly lead to simplicity, efficiency, consistency or transparency.

The principal tasks of the presidency are to set the agenda of European Council and Council of Ministers’ meetings, to prepare European Council meetings, to chair both institutions and to represent the Union externally.

The Councils could all appoint their own chairpersons for an agreed period, rotating if they wished. European Council meetings could be prepared by the General Affairs Council, assisted by the Commission. The Union could be represented externally by a new foreign minister, an idea already broadly agreed.

There appears to be a consensus in the Convention and among the EU-15 that the legislative and non-legislative functions of the Council should be separated and that the proceedings of the former should be held in public.

If the Council were separated between a legislative council and a non-legislative one, there would no longer be any need for a strict institutional separation between the non-legislative activities of the Council and Commission. These Council formations could be chaired by the relevant commissioner with the foreign minister (who would also be a Commission vice-president) chairing the External Affairs Council.

There is extensive support in the Convention for the Commission president to be elected by the European Parliament and confirmed by the European Council by qualified majority.

The Council represents the legitimacy of member states, the Parliament the legitimacy of the people and the Commission the legitimacy of the European interest. This triangle of institutions must be strengthened.

The solution above increases legitimacy by Parliament electing the Commission president; increases simplicity by abolishing the Council presidency; increases efficiency by concentrating external representation on the foreign minister; increases consistency by improving coordination between the Council and the Commission; and increases transparency by establishing a separate legislative council.

Stanley Crossick is a director and founding chairman of the European Policy Centre.

The keynote speaker at the 20th anniversary celebration of the European Medicines Agency offered some challenges to conventional thinking about the next 20 years – including carefully calculated provocations of his hosts.